Analysis of the phenomenon of "attention shift" as a marker of psycho-emotional stress

Compliance with the principles of mental health is a priority task in the education of children and adolescents. Researchers present the results of the analysis of psychophysiological studies, mostly by foreign authors, devoted to the problem of biomarkers of psycho-emotional stress (anxiety, aggression). The authors have considered the phenomenon of attention biases (attention shifts), as well as behavioral inhibition. We have analyzed the role of bioelectric asymmetry of the frontal areas of the brain, amygdala and prefrontal cortex. Scientists have shown the role of two basic motivational systems of approach/achievement ("approach system") and avoidance/withdrawal ("withdrawal system"). The use of adequate psychophysiological tests, such as: dot-probe tasks, attention shifting tasks, temporal order judgment tasks, visual search tasks allows you to best identify attention shifts and observe changes in the bioelectric activity of the brain. The asymmetry of the EEG of the frontal areas of the brain; the ratios of slow EEG waves to fast ones (theta / beta ratio; delta / beta ratio); changes in the parameters of the components of the evoked potentials P1, N1, N2 and late positive potential (LPP) with attention shifts you can consider as markers of psychoemotional tension. You can take into account the understanding of the mechanisms of shifting attention to threatening information in anxious children and adolescents in the prevention of mental health and to create corrective methods of training the system of attention to information with the opposite motivating value, allowing for adaptive behavior in the future.

Contribution:
Astashchenko A.P. — research concept and design;
Gubina O.I. — research concept and design, data collection and processing;
Popov M.V. — data collection and processing, writing and editing of the text;
Yashchenko I.N. — writing and editing of the text;
Sazonova O.V. — research concept and design;
Gavryushin M.Yu. — writing and editing of the text.

Funding. The study had no funding.

Conflict of interests. The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Received: 11.04.2022 / Accepted: 15.04.2022 / Published: 25.05.2022

1. Kolenchukova O.A., Dolgushina E.N., Ryupina A.A., Kratasyuk V.A., Medvedeva N.N. Antioxidant status as the marker of the health in students in the time of their intensive intellectual activities. Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2018; 4: 332–6 (in Russian).

2. Bukhtiyarov I.V., Denisov E.I., Zhovnerchuk E.V., Serikov V.V., Khatin D.E., Moskovenko A.V. Work-related mental health: current state of the art (literature review). Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2021; 100(11): 1236-43. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2021-100-11-1236-1243 (in Russian).

3. Ushakov I.B., Melikhova E.P., Libina I.I., Gubina O.I. Hygienic and psychophysiological peculiarities of formation health of students of the medical university. Gigiena i Sanitaria. 2018; 97(8): 756–761. https://doi.org/10.18821/0016-9900-2018-97-8-756-761 (in Russian).

4. Shuvaev V.T., Suvorov N.F. Basal ganglia and behavior. St- Petersburg; 2001; 278 (in Russian).

5. Haller S.P.W., Doherty B.R., Duta M., Cohen K., Kadosh J.Y.F., Scerif L., Gaia. Attention allocation and social worries predict interpretations of peer-related social cues in adolescents. Cognitive Neuroscience. 2017; 25: 105–12.

6. Xiaocong Z., Yunying Dong, Renlai Zhou. Examination Stress Results in Attentional Bias and Altered Neural Reactivity in Test-Anxious Individuals. Neural Plasticity. 2018; Website https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3281040

7. Miller N.V., Johnston C. Social threat attentional bias in childhood: Relations to aggression and hostile intent attributions. Aggressive Behavior. 2019; 45(3): 245–54.

8. Yu F., Guo Y.Y. On the relationship between attentional bias and attribution bias of aggressors. Advances in Psychological Science. 2009; 17(4): 821–8.

9. Platt B., Murphy S.E. , Lau J.Y.F. The association between negative attention biases and symptoms of depression in a community sample of adolescents. PeerJ. 2015; 3: e1372. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1372

10. Trapp W., Kalzendorf C., Baum C., Hajak G., Lautenbacher S. Attentional biases in patients suffering from unipolar depression: results of a dot probe task investigation. Psychiatry Research. 2018; 261: 325–31.

11. Cisler J.M., Koster E.H.W. Mechanisms of attentional biases towards threat in anxiety disorders: An integrative review. Clinical Psychology Review. 2010; 30: 203–16.

12. White L.K., Degnan K.A., Henderson H.A., Perez-Edgar K., Walker O.L., Shechner T., Leibenluft E., Bar-Haim Y., Pine D.S., Fox N.A. Developmental relations among behavioral inhibition, anxiety, and attention biases to threat and positive information. Child Development. 2017; 88(1): 141–55.

13. Vannestea S., Verplaetseb J., Hiela A.V., Braeckman J. Attention bias toward noncooperative people. A dot probe classification study in cheating detection. Evolution and human behavior. 2007; 28: 272–6.

14. Smith P., Waterman M. Processing bias for aggression words in forensic and nonforensic samples. Cognition and emotion. 2003; 17: 681–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930302281

15. Smith P., Waterman M. Role of experience in processing bias for aggressive words in forensic and non-forensic populations. Aggressive behavior. 2004; 30: 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20001

16. Zhang Ke., Zhang Dajun. Attentional bias on different emotional valence information: among college students with different implicit aggression. Canadian social science. 2015; 11(8): 73–9.

17. Staller M.S., Zaiser B., Körner S., Cole.J.C. Threat-related attentional biases in police officers and martial artists: investigating potential differences using the e-Stroop and dot probe task. Sage Open. 2017; 7(2): 1–17.

18. Field A.P., Lester K.J. Is there room for development in developmental models of information processing biases to threat in children and adolescents? Clinical child family psychology review. 2010; 13(4): 315–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-010-0078-8

19. Morales S., Fu X., Perez-Edgar K.E. A developmental neuroscience perspective on affect-biased attention. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2016; 21: 26–41.

20. Rooijen R., Ploeger A., Kret M.E. The dot-probe task to measure emotional attention: A suitable measure in comparative studies? Psychonmic bullrtin review. 2017; 24(6): 1686–1717. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1224-1

21. Franklin Z.C., Holmes P.S., Fowler N.E. Eye gaze markers indicate visual attention to threatening images in individuals with chronic back pain. Journal of clinical medicine. 2019; 8(1): 31. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8010031

22. Knyazev G.G., Savostyanov A.N., Levin E.A., Slobodskoi-Plusnin J.Y., Bocharov A.V. EEG Correlates of anxiety. Bulletin of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Medical Science. 2009; 1(135): 74–80 (in Russian).

23. Rusalova M.N. The alpha rhythm amplitude as an index of the stability of emotional image in mental reproduction from memory. Journal asymmetry. 2015; 9(4): 4–17 (in Russian).

24. Harrewijn A., Van der Molen M.J.W., Westenberg P. M. Putative EEG measures of social anxiety: Comparing frontal alpha asymmetry and delta–beta cross-frequency correlation. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience. 2016; 16: 1086–98.

25. Cole C., Zapp D.J., Nelson S.K., Perez-Edgar K. Speech Presentation Cues Moderate Frontal EEG Asymmetry in Socially Withdrawn Young Adults. Brain Cognition. 2012; 78(2): 156–62.

26. Perez-Edgar K., Kujawa A., Nelson S.K., Cole C., Zapp D.J. The relation between electroencephalogram asymmetry and attention biases to threat at baseline and under stress. Brain Cognition. 2013; 82(3): 337–43.

27. Putman P., Peer J., Maimari I., Werff S. EEG theta/beta ratio in relation to fear-modulated response-inhibition, attentional control, and affective traits. Biological Psychology. 2010; 83: 73–78.

28. Son D., Doe W., Band G., Putman P. EEG theta/beta ratio neurofeedback training in healthy females. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback. 2020; 45(3); 195–210.

29. Eldar S., Yankelevitch R., Lamy D., Bar-Haim Y. Enhanced neural reactivity and selective attention to threat in anxiety. Biological Psychology. 2010; 85(2): 252–7.

30. Rossignol M., Campanella S., Bissot C., Philippot P. Fear of negative evaluation and attentional bias for facial expressions: an event-related study. Brain and Cognition. 2013; 82(3): 344–52.

31. Davidson R.J., The neural circuitry of emotion and affective style: prefrontal cortex and amygdala contributions. Social Science Information. 2001; 40(1): 11–37.

32. Weber M.A., Morrow K.A., Rizer W.S., Kangas K.J., Carlson J. Sustained, not habituated, activity in the human amygdala: A pilot fMRI dot-probe study of attentional bias to fearful faces. Cogent Psychology. 2016; 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2016.1259881

33. Xiaoxue Fu, Bradley C. Taber-Thomas, Koraly Perez-Edgar. Frontolimbic functioning during threat-related attention: Relations to early behavioral inhibition and anxiety in children. Biological Psychology. 2017; 122: 98–109.

34. Aftanas L.I., Pavlov S.V. Peculiarities of interhemispheric EEG band power distribution in high anxiety individuals under emotionally neutral and aversive arousal conditions. Journal of higher nervous activity. 2005; 55(3): 322–28 (in Russian).

35. Davidson R.J., Ekman P., Saron C.D., Senulis J.A., Friesen W.V. Approach-withdrawal and cerebral asymmetry: emotional expression and brain physiology. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1990; 58(2): 330–41.

36. Adolph D., Glischinski M., Wannemüller A., Margraf J. The influence of frontal alpha-asymmetry on the processing of approach and withdrawal-related stimuli. A multichannel psychophysiology study. Psychophysiology. 2017; 54(9): 1295–310.

37. Fox N.A., Henderson H.A., Marshall P.J., Nichols K.E., Ghera M.M. Behavioral inhibition: linking biology and behavior within a developmental framework. Annual Review of Psychology. 2005; 56(1): 235–62.

38. Fox N.A., Russo R., Bowles R., Dutto K. Do threatening stimuli draw or hold visual attention in subclinical anxiety? Journal of experimental psychology: general. 2001; 130(4): 681–700.

39. Astashchenko A.P., Gorbatenko N.P., Dorokhov E.V., Varvarova S.I., Zyablova P.V. Influence of anxiety related to examination stress on visual attention shifts and electric activity of brain front zones. Ulyanovsk medical and biological journal. 2020; 2: 100–11. https://doi.org/10.34014/2227-1848-2020-2-100-11 (in Russian).

40. Musa C.Z., Lepine J.P. Cognitive aspects of social phobia: a review of theories and experimental research. European Psychiatry. 2000; 15(1): 59–66.

41. Shechner T., Rimon-Chakir A., Britton J.C., Lotan D., Apter A., Bliese P.D., Pine D.S., Bar-Haim Y. Attention bias modification treatment augmenting effects on cognitive behavioral therapy in children with anxiety: randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent. 2014; 53(1): 61–71.

42. Ushakov I.B., Popov V.I., Petrova T.N., Esaulenko I.E. Studies of student’s health as a result of interaction between medical biologic, ecologic and social hygienic rick factors. Occupational medicine and industrial ecology. 2017; 4: 33–6 (in Russian).

43. Evdokimov V.I., Gubina O.I., Popov V.I., Bocharov V.V., Tupitsyn Yu.Ya., Zhuk S.P. Technique of the estimation of mental health and parameters of adaptation of students VSMA. System analysis and control in biomedical systems. 2005; 4(4): 457–60 (in Russian).

44. Schoth D.E., Georgallis T., Liossi C. Attentional bias modification in people with chronic pain: a proof of concept study. Cognitive behavior therapy. 2013; 2(3): 233–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2013.777105

45. Sharpe L., Ianiello M., Dear B.F., Perry K., Refshauge K., Nicholas M.K. Is there a potential role for attention bias modification in pain patients? Results of 2 randomised, controlled trials. Pain. 2012; 153(3): 722–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2011.12.014